Guilds Some Improvements For Guilds

You raise some fair points, but...

If it's still 3 minutes, that should be plenty, especially with all the bug fixes guilds have been getting.

The whole point of territories is that the more you work for them, the more you gain, no? By extending the time, it just means Guilds have to work less to gain more, meaning bigger guilds will benefit even more (this is the most important point in the paragraph). 15 minutes is far too long, 10 is still pretty long, but 5 might be acceptable. Guilds grow by consistently attacking territories, often several at a time (at least, that's how we did it), over long periods of time, gaining bits of xp and emeralds for intervals. The more you do that, the faster you grow, and the easier it becomes. It may not be easy for small guilds to claim tons of territories, but if it was, it would sort of defeat the purpose of growing in the first place. Imagine a game where the skill cap is so low that a newbie can beat a highly-experienced veteran: not exactly going to be a very competitive game.

Same situation, bigger scale. The biggest guilds have always controlled all of the most important and useful areas, the total number of territories has just increased since then. While you're probably right about it being worse, it really isn't much different of a situation from when Kangro, WynnTheory, or any of the old guilds were on top. In fact, it may even have been worse in the past, thanks to huge alliances that meant they could control and attack more territories at once. But that's only a maybe

That's how it always was, until smaller guilds decide to do something about it.

this goes back to the attitude issue so we'll just pass this over

If you're taking an hour to defeat the 1000 mobs, you shouldn't be attempting to take it. The only issue should ever be Bob. This is one thing that I can't say for sure, though, since things may have changed from my days, but we were always able to take back territories with only 2-3 level 75s. You don't need to be big to beat them. Not saying it should also only take you 2 minutes, but if you're not willing to put in effort then you're never going to get rewards.

This kind of attitude has always existed. Even taking into consideration how things have probably changed, this is more an issue of defeatism than actual gameplay issues. It's supposed to be hard to strike it big. Again, if it wasn't, Guilds wouldn't be competitive.


tl;dr no pain no gain, but some small increases in time might be ok

 

plus there are rewards for owning territories that are exclusive to anything else like leaderboards or just general prestige

 

I think you're misunderstanding the goal of this suggestion. We wouldn't slay any less mobs in the guild war, pay any less $ to defend with mobs, or coordinate any less to attack multiple territories if the only thing changing is the baseline length of time we can get material gain before being vulnerable. The bigger guilds already hold claim to some number of territories 24/7. What CAN change is the opportunity (the key word here) for small and mid-level guilds to benefit from their newly acquired land. More opportunity for benefits will make more people want to put in the work. It's all a big circle, a circle motivated by attitude, to which you said this...

It's not just super hard to strike it big, it's literally impossible where we stand at this point. Do you really think the whole "Attitude" thing is just laziness or "purely not wanting" to go out and attack/defend territories? Most likely that's not the case, it's largely due to the inequalities in the system and how susbtantially far ahead the top guilds are. Defeatism is reactionary; it doesn't come out of nowhere. Wheras gameplay issues exist all the time. They may be short lived, or in what i think is the case with guilds, remain undiscovered or unaddressed for years. You could be implying with that quote that guilds are hopeless by default. I believe my thinking is on a deeper level, being "hmm, maybe something about the guild system is not very bottom-90% of guilds-friendly, and could be the source of their negative attitude?"

Listen, Hyco and I are not trying to baby all the guilds who aren't at the top. We're trying to come up with ways to help them have more of a chance against the big guns, and if the ideas in this thread aren't appealing to the community, maybe there's something else. I just take offense to opinions like yours who think the guilds lower down are at 100% fault, by default. You can't expect people who hate a system to magically become happy and be able to compete with the best. If people think something is broken, why would they want to play along and expect it to fix itself? Now IF there are people who think the system is fine but don't compete, then you're right, they're the root of the problem in that case. Hyco and I aren't those kind of people, and I'd like to believe we're not alone.

... And >that< is my endgame message.